MOST Environments and Storytelling

MOST Environments (Multimedia environments that Organize and Support Text) was developed by the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV) in order to help develop literacy in young children (Bransford et al., 1996). The approach used is to organize “instruction around visually rich, meaningful 'macrocontexts' that students and teachers can mutually share and explore” (Bransford et al, 1996, p. 223).

This model was interesting from a few different perspectives:

• It reminded me again of a staple assignment in grade school where we worked in groups to 'publish' a book, using coil binding with cardboard for covers and regular computer paper for the text pages. Today there are so many more sophisticated technologies that students could use to actually publish a pretty good quality bound volume – it seems to me that this assignment would be even more appealing to students. It made me wonder how students would react to the old-school version of the assignment – which I nevertheless enjoyed. 
• The use of the puppet was interesting for me from the perspective of teaching my own (future, hypothetical) children. But it made me somewhat doubtful whether any aspect of this approach could be applied to college learners.
• At a stretch, the idea of using multimedia delivery of information to support mental model building, may be one aspect that applies to college students. I've used concept mapping as a way to get at mental model building – I used it with a 300 level honors seminar class of students. The class was discussing the topic of peer review, and students were asked to map out their current understanding of how the peer review process worked (they'd had readings assigned on this topic for that day, though none of them necessarily explicitly explained this process in great detail). Then we watched the peer review in 5 minutes video, and then students were given a different colored pen to make any adjustments to their map. Many of the students made small revisions, but the kinds of revisions were different across students. The remainder of the class was used to discuss the readings in more detail. I've also had feedback from some of the writing instructors who have used some of our videos – they suggest that the stories seem to 'really stick' with their students, many of them referring back to the videos later in discussions further along in the semester.

In terms of possible tools – I recently re-discovered Aviary's fairly full suite of tools. Considering how expensive Adobe products can be, I think this is a great free resource, though I haven't used it very much yet. There also seem to be fairly good 'freemium' concept mapping tools available either online or for download.

Reference

Bransford, J.D., Sharp, D.M., Vye, N.J. Goldman, S.R., Hasselbring, T.S., Going, L., O’Banion, K., Livernois, J., Saul, E., with the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1996). MOST environments for accelerating literacy development. In S. Vosniadour, E. De Cort, R. Glaser, & H. Mandl (eds.), International Perspectives on the Design of Technolgoy-Supported Learning Environments (pp. 223-255)

Legacy Model Modified for Academic Literacy

The STAR Legacy Modules offer a great instructional design model, that allows for a range of instructors to implement it in flexible ways. (The somewhat strange sounding name, especially when used out of context,   comes from the software shell developed by CTGV and stands for "Software Technology for Action and Reflection where one of the actions is to leave a legacy" (Schwartz et al., 1999, p.189). The model consists of several phases that constitute an inquiry cycle, with increasingly challenging cycles building in succession, which is designed to allow learners to "progressively deepen their expertise" (Schwartz et al., 1999, p.189). The phases of each inquiry cycle include the following:

1. (Initial or successive) Problem or Challenge
2. Idea Generation (recalling prior knowledge)
3. Perspectives and Resources (new and/or expert information, practice, scaffolding)
4. Assessment (formative)
5. Wrap up (present best solutions, fed back into perspectives and resources for subsequent learners) (Schwartz et al., 1999).

This model just makes sense to me in ways that the preceding models somehow didn't quite - and these are the things that I think make it so great:

• It seems to be grounded in a natural cycle of how people learn new things or build on what they already know – except that it makes what are often very implicit meta-cognitive skills not only explicit but well-organized. I think Schwartz et al. stuck a very good balance in this design that is “flexibly adaptive rather than totally prescriptive or totally unstructured” (1999, p. 188)
• I also love that it offers a built in feedback loop to help refresh and evolve the instructional content. In this aspect, the model not only offers a design for instruction, but perhaps can be used to generate better solutions to persistent problems over time.
• It's great that the model acknowledges learners' prior knowledge and the importance of using that to provide context for their learning (instead of assuming that all learners start at the same place, from nothing). This phase also embeds the process of collecting pre-and post-test reslults in a way that is conducive to learning instead of as an extra step outside of the learning process for purely research or administrative reasons.
• Lastly, it provides relevant and expert resources in a way that they must be explored by the learner and worked in with their existing knowledge towards a specific goal – which is a process that is more similar to how problems are addressed in the real world (except that you usually have to build up and maintain your own pool of expert contacts and resources). What I think is a great strength in the thinking behind the model, that is also key to offering flexibility, is that the resources are not there to 'give away' solutions but rather “point toward relevant domains of inquiry” (p.199), regardless of which domain that may be.

All of these qualities are very important for the kind of instruction that I do. It is often a challenge to effectively assess student learning or their skill levels since they come from such diverse academic backgrounds. The Libraries are also in a position of unique perspective in that we work with researchers, students and staff across disciplines and across the range of years they are at NC State. I'm always thinking of ways to make the most of this this unique position and I'm hoping that I can do some of that through the flexible and legacy aspects of this model. I'm hoping to explore the possibilities in a concrete way for the third module assignment for this course – that is, develop a prototype for helping students learn academic research skills using this model. Here is a possible outline of how this might work in one or two inquiry cycles:

Cycle 1

Initial Problem or Challenge:

• Research paper assignment for an ENG 101 course.

Idea Generation (recalling prior knowledge):

• Consider previous experiences (e.g., approaches taken with assignments from high school).
• Strategies for approaching this assignment.
• Possible contacts for help or advice.

Perspectives and Resources (new and/or expert information, practice, scaffolding):

• Online orientation to using the Libraries website for research papers.
• Video tutorials on using Summon, library catalog, print resources.
• Academic writing and references
• Citation management tools

Assessment (formative):

• Paper outline
• Annotated resource list

Wrap up:

• Reflect on most challenging aspect of the process and how it was managed

Cycle 2

Initial Problem or Challenge:

• Company analysis report for a 300 level professional writing course.

Idea Generation (recalling prior knowledge):

• Consider previous experiences (e.g., approaches taken with ENG 101 assignments).
• Strategies for approaching this assignment.
• Possible contacts for help or advice.

Perspectives and Resources (new and/or expert information, practice, scaffolding):

• Sources of company information.
• Business writing guides.
• APA citation guide for business sources.

Assessment (formative):

• Report outline
• Annotated resource list

Wrap up:

• Reflect on most challenging aspect of the process and how it was managed

One challenge will be to think about how such a module may be used either within or outside of course contexts, and being able to administer each cycle in a scalable way. Also, a significant adjustment to the model is that there is limited control over how the students may move through the two cycles. That is, although most freshmen take ENG 101 in their freshmen year, some take it later or not at all. Also, given the large number of sections for either ENG 101 and the professional writing classes (thousands of students take these each year) some sections may use these modules while others use a different approach.

Another, second idea:

Initial Problem or Challenge:

• You are a technology start up and are entering a local New Venture Fund Competition. Submissions require a well-researched business plan. What sources can you use to inform your business plans?

Idea Generation (recalling prior knowledge):

• Consider previous work experience
• Possible contacts
• Resources at hand

Perspectives and Resources (new and/or expert information, practice, scaffolding):

• Business research basics video
• Successful entrepreneur tips (a/v?)
• Annotated resource list

Assessment (formative):

• Annotated resource list

Wrap up:

• Reflect on most challenging aspect of the process and how they managed it as a group.
• Final recommended resource list
• Video with three points of advice

The second cycle in this case would be actually starting to draft the plan, talk to potential customers and prototype products/services - which would be beyond my expertise.

References

Schwartz, D., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J.D. (1999). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. Instructional-design theories and models, 2, 183-214.

Anchored in Context

Anchored instruction is based on the frameworks of situated cognition and aims to create an environment in which learning can take place through sustained exploration of problems in 'authentic' contexts (CTGV, 1992). Such contexts are presented in the form of stories in order to manage the complexity of the problem to be solved, as well as the information resources for solving the problem. Given that true apprenticeship is not always scalable to meet the needs of large groups of learners, this approach aims to create situations that help to simulate the learning contexts of apprenticeship, and therefore the benefits associated with it. The model involves a number of different steps but the basic stages may be outlined in the following way:

• Engage with a specific scenario in the form of a story, and explore the details of that story.
• Present a problem within the context of the story.
• Invite learners to use the information that has been provided through the story to solve the problem, reviewing the details of the available information as necessary.
• Students are encouraged to work in groups.
• Students may received expert feedback regarding solutions to the problem.

I like the idea of creating an environment for learning to take place, since I have always thought that you can't ever determine when learning will take place for a student. You can deliver material, provide feedback and pace out the process through the academic calendar, but individual students ultimately have to set aside time to make meaningful connections through all the resources, assignments and problem sets that they must plow through in a given semester. I also thought that the idea of 'inert knowledge' vs. 'spontaneous use of information' was interesting and in many ways very true. It made me wonder if it weren't the case that in an effort to be efficient at developing knowledge, the trade-off has been creating lots of inert knowledge at the cost of inadequately developing the ability to spontaneously make use of any any accessible knowledge. I think a strength of the anchor model is this aim to help train students to “use knowledge as tools” instead of an “arbitrary sets of procedures or facts” (CTGV, 1992, p.247).

Even though the authors opposed using 'contrived situations' in favor of 'authentic life scenarios' – I thought that their scenarios were actually quite contrived. In some ways I think entirely fantastic scenarios that still required real life problem solving would be better than inadequately authentic scenarios. At one point one of the articles mentioned providing an encyclopedia of information and that made me think of a Nintendo game I used to play with my brother as a kid called, Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? It even came with a mini encyclopedia!

Given the quality of immersive video gaming environments now available, I think it would be quite expensive to develop multimedia contexts that could compete. It seems that (passable quality) animation in general is quite expensive to produce – especially if the goal is to create sustained interactions. I don't know how attractive this kind of approach would be for adult learners – it seems more appropriate for younger students? I think libraries have begun to create some pretty good videos with some animation explaining concepts and offering advice - a good example is this one by Peabody Library at Vanderbilt:

Perhaps one way to take these production a step further will be to apply some of the aspects of anchored instruction? This made me think about what animation tools were available and here are some I found.

References

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV). (1992). Anchored instruction in science and mathematics: Theoretical basis, developmental projects, and initial research findings. In R. A. Duschl, & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp.244-273). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

4th Annual Hexapod Haiku 2011 - Under Age 13 Category

Just wanted to let folks know that NC State's 4th Annual Hexapod Haiku poetry contest is accepting submissions. There is a special category for submissions by children under age 13 - which I thought might be of interest to some of you who teach young children.

I've helped judge for the past 3 years and some of our favorites have been the under 13 submissions, which were often accompanied by hand-drawn pictures - here is an example of a runner-up from a poet under age 13 from 2010.

More info about the contest and submissions here:
http://insectmuseum.org/haiku.php

Goal Based Scenarios & Storytelling

As developed by Schank, Berman & Macpherson, Goal Based Scenarios method of instruction aims to develop skills in learners over gaining factual knowledge (1999). Seven essential components of goal based scenarios are offered as part of this method:

• Goals
• includes process and content knowledge
• Mission
• motivational and somewhat realistic
• Cover Story
• background or context giving rise to the mission
• Role
• who the student will play;
• closely tied to skills and knowledge to be developed
• Scenario Operations
• activities the student does;
• scoped to allow for decision points and consequences but nothing more beyond that
• Resources
• well-organized and readily accessible information
• delivered in the form of stories
• stories as extensions of stories that students already know
• Feedback
• situated
• timely
• delivered as 
• consequence of actions; 
• coaching; and/or 
• domain experts' stories of similar experiences

When I first read Schank et al.'s “Advise the President” cover story, my initial reaction was that it was too artificial and not motivating for the current me or a younger me in school. I think this is a particular challenge to successfully using this method – the instructor may think that a particular cover story is really interesting and engaging but it may actually offer varying degrees of appeal for any number of individual students in a class. However, if you can craft a truly motivating and appealing cover story, I think the notion of using stories to reflect on consequences of actions taken, and doing so as a way to develop expertise, can be very rewarding. I think it is a very useful 'habit of mind' to develop in young children as well as working professionals. In addition to being creative in coming up with a good cover story, the instructor would need to think ahead several steps to deliver meaningful and timely feedback as a result of consequences.

The use of a cover story reminded me again of the library scavenger hunt activity I did with the Engineering Entrepreneurship students. The cover story that I had prepared was that each team was competing for seed money from a venture funding agency. The grant was also geared towards mobile technologies. In order to prepare an application the team had to consult a variety of information sources. In reading Schank, Berman and Mcpherson, helped me think about how I might improve the activity. In hindsight I realized that the consequences and feedback portions could be developed futher, using some of the strategies outlined in this method.

I've had a chance to explore Udutu a little bit, and think it might be a good tool to use for authoring scenario based content – it provides adjustable layouts where you can set out multiple options or actions, and selecting one over the other will take you down a particular path. I think you can sort of do this through careful planning using PowerPoint slides, but then I think you still need to figure out a way to get it online while maintaining the interactive features – all of that is already set up in Udutu though you're more limited in terms of the look and feel (though there are a selection of templates and additional options with paid hosting).

References

Schank, R.C., Berman, T.R., & Macpherson, K.A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (2nd ed., pp.161-182). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.